Author Topic: Blood scraped from outside of Silencer before Silencer was given to Police..  (Read 311 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
David Boutflour not only tried to unscrew the silencers metal end cap from the Silencer he had found at the scene on 10th August 1985, once he got it back to his sisters house, but he also removed a crucial flake of dried blood from the outer sleeve of the same Silencer, using a razor blade! He kept the flake of blood he told COLP, because it fascinated him! Can you imagine that? The relatives handed over a silencer to DS Jones on evening 12th August 1985, and kept the crucial flake of blood  to themselves, depriving Glynis Howard an opportunity to analyse it on the 13th August 1985 when Cook brought the tampered with silencer to the Lab' on that date, minus the flake of blood that Boutflour had removed from the outside of it!

What we now know, with the benefit of hindsight, is that at some stage after the relatives gave the silencer to DS Jones, that the police were informed about what David Boutflour had done, and that he had got it in his possession, the dried flake of blood! This occurred after the 13th August 1985, otherwise the flake would have accompanied the silencer SJ/1 (22) to the lab' with Cook, and Howard would have dealt with it then!

Between the 13th August and the 30th August 1985, Cook retained possession of the silencer SJ/1 (22), and in fact, he also inexplicably decided to tamper with the internal mechanism of that silencer, by removing all of its internal mechanisms so that after unscrewing the silencers metal end cap, and top washer, he laid out all of the 17 baffle plates on the worktop, and separated the first five or six baffle plates do that there was a noticeable gap between them, leaving the remaining baffle plates tightly compacted together..

If there had been any blood on any of these baffle plates, Cook would have been the person who found it!

Here is a photograph taken by Cook himself of the exercise he performed himself on the 29th August 1985, which confirms what Cook did on that occasion..
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
Now, before we go any further, I will remind everybody, about the official version of how the blood inside the silencer was supposedly discovered inside it, a silencer which was supposedly at the lab' on 12th September 1985, when the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher took it upon himself to dismantle the same silencer, which David Boutflour had already tampered with, and the same silencer which Cook had already dismantled and found no blood whatsoever on any of the baffle plates he had separated, and so it beggars belief, that no sooner does the silencer allegedly arrive at the lab' by 12th September 1985, there is blood all over it's baffle plates?

Well, first of all I don't think the silencer was ever at the lab' on the 12th September 1985, to enable Fletcher to discover the blood inside it, what I believe took place was that by the 30th August 1985, it had been brought to the attention of Essex police that David Boutflour had scraped the dried flake of blood from off the outside of the silencers metal sleeve, I believe that police took possession of this flake, giving it the exhibit reference of DB/1, and that it was this flake which got sent along to Huntingdon Lab' on 30th August 1985, along with the photographs which Cook had taken covering his dismantling exercise of the silencer. Cook submitted the Boutflour flake (DB/1) which attracted a lab' item number of (23)...

The only time a silencer had ever been to the lab' prior to this had been on 13th August 1985, under an exhibit reference SJ/1, lab' item number 22..

Silencer - SJ/1 , lab' item number (22), 13th August 1985..
Flake - DB/1, lab' item number (23), 30th August 1985..

The flake DB/1 (23) arriving at the lab' on the understanding that it had been scraped from the outside of the silencer SJ/1 (22) by David Boutflour, on some unspecified occasion in-between the date he found the silencer, and the date that Peter Eaton handed over the same silencer to DS Jones! With the benefit of hindsight, we know that Boutflour claims to have found the first of two silencers at whf on the 10th August 1985, and that Peter Eaton handed it over to DS Jones by the end of the evening of 12th August 1985..

We can safely adduce, therefore, that somewhere between the 10th August 1985 and the evening of 12th August 1985, that David Boutflour had tampered with the integrity of the silencer evidence, first of all by trying to physically unscrew the silencers end cap off it, and secondly, not satisfied with rendering the silencer evidence inadmissible, he went further and scraped dried blood from the outside of the silencers metal sleeve using a razor blade! The significance of using a razor blade in which to scrape dried blood from the outside of the silencer quite possibly being the source by why an inch long elongated scratch mark mysteriously appeared on the silencers outer casing!

Not a great deal has been written about this elongated scratch mark, other than the relatives stating that the silencer Peter Eaton handed over had this 1" elongated scratch mark on it! Well, silencers are manufactured using hardened gun metal, and it is rather telling that the police nor any expert from the lab' have commented upon what could have caused this particular scratch mark! But, I can now reveal why the police, the relatives, and the experts at the lab' have tried to play down the existence of the one inch elongated scratch mark on the outer casing of the silencer which was handed over to DS Jones by Peter Eaton on the evening 12th August 1985  - but back in 2003 A test was carried out using a Parker Hale silencer and a razor blade..
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 05:38:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146

Not a great deal has been written about this elongated scratch mark, other than the relatives stating that the silencer Peter Eaton handed over had this 1" elongated scratch mark on it! Well, silencers are manufactured using hardened gun metal, and it is rather telling that the police nor any expert from the lab' have commented upon what could have caused this particular scratch mark! But, I can now reveal why the police, the relatives, and the experts at the lab' have tried to play down the existence of the one inch elongated scratch mark on the outer casing of the silencer which was handed over to DS Jones by Peter Eaton on the evening 12th August 1985  - but back in 2003 A test was carried out using a Parker Hale silencer and a razor blade..

I can reveal that if you scrape a razor blade along the outer sleeve of a Parker Hale silencer that it will leave a shiny scratch mark there! The fact that the elongated scratch mark on the silencer at the heart of this prosecution was about one inch in length, was because that corresponded to the area on the outside of that silencer at the time David Boutflour scraped the flake of dried blood off it!
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 05:44:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
I can reveal that if you scrape a razor blade along the outer sleeve of a Parker Hale silencer that it will leave a shiny scratch mark there! The fact that the elongated scratch mark on the silencer at the heart of this prosecution was about one inch in length, was because that corresponded to the area on the outside of that silencer at the time David Boutflour scraped the flake of dried blood off it!

We know, with the benefit of hindsight, that the silencer (DRB/1) Court Exhibit No.9, exhibited during the trial in October 1986, had no such shiny scratch mark anywhere at all on its outer casing!

What this tells us all, is that the silencer (DRB/1) exhibited at trial, was not the same silencer (SJ/1), 22, that David Boutflour had scraped the flake of blood off the outside of, it now seems almost certain why between the lot of them, they had to switch the silencers! They had to switch the silencers ( SJ/1 with DRB/1) because of the shiny scratch mark on the outer sleeve of SJ/1 (22), if the silencers hadn't been swapped over, there was the real prospect that the defence experts would have cottoned on to something having been scraped from the outside of the silencer, which in turn may have alerted everyone to the strong possibility that David Boutflour had deliberately interfered with the silencers integrity, and that Sheila Caffell's blood had been present on the outside of the silencer removed by him, and not found inside the silencer by the ballistic expert, Fletcher!
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 05:56:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
I invite everyone who has access to a Parker Hale silencer, and a razor blade, to carry out your own tests to confirm how that one inch elongated scratch mark had been made on the first silencer SJ/1 (22) - it got made when David Boutflour scratched off the key flake of dried blood, which the experts at the lab' and with the consent of Essex police, attributed the results obtained from the examination of that flake, as having been found inside the silencer, rather than outside of it...
« Last Edit: January 02, 2019, 07:42:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6495
Mike, DRB says that it was "Thick enough to peel with a razor blade". He does not explicity state he done it.

However how can he know what he is looking at is blood?
He attempts to unscrew it but apparently can't. Despite being designed to be unscrewed by hand.
He fails to notice the grey hair. Only once it has gone from AE and PE to SBJ does the hair appear.

Its all very fishy.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23419
Mike, DRB says that it was "Thick enough to peel with a razor blade". He does not explicity state he done it.

However how can he know what he is looking at is blood?
He attempts to unscrew it but apparently can't. Despite being designed to be unscrewed by hand.
He fails to notice the grey hair. Only once it has gone from AE and PE to SBJ does the hair appear.

Its all very fishy.

Because he's not an imbecile.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
Mike, DRB says that it was "Thick enough to peel with a razor blade". He does not explicity state he done it.

However how can he know what he is looking at is blood?
He attempts to unscrew it but apparently can't. Despite being designed to be unscrewed by hand.
He fails to notice the grey hair. Only once it has gone from AE and PE to SBJ does the hair appear.

Its all very fishy.

David1819..

He told the COLP investigators, that he did use a razor blade to scrape blood off the silencer - COLP have been very clever in the manner with which they have reported this particular matter..

First of all, Glynis Howard analysed the blood that was present inside the 1/4 inch aperture on the first silencers end cap, on or after 13th August 1985, but if David Boutflour had scraped all the blood from the first silencer, Glynis Howard would not have been able to confirm that it was human blood...

Boutflour did use a razor blade to scrape blood from the outside of the silencer, I am saying that he scraped a flake of dried blood from the metal sleeve which housed the baffle plates, if you want to argue the toss, and say that ' no, he didn't, or no he hadn't, well then that is a matter for you!

Irrespective of who did what, or who said this or that, Anthony Pargeter removed a dried flake of blood from that very first silencer, as described..

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6495
This is interesting.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
Yes, of course this is interesting...

But why don't you post up the reference to the COLP officers where David Boutflour confirms that he had scraped the flake of dried blood from the outside of the first silencer, moreover that he not only scraped the flake of dried blood from the outside of the silencer, but that he retained that flake of dried blood, and that he did all of this, because using his own words, 'it fascinated him'...

What fascinated him?

It was the piece of dried blood which he had scraped from the outside of the silencer using a razor blade!

It was a piece of dried blood, which he sought to keep all to himself, because 'it fascinated him'..

Essex police (he told COLP) were aware of what he had done!

What?

They were aware that he had seen blood in the silencers aperture?

OK..

So, why did he mentioned a razor blade?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 07:51:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
In this example, I could present others, David Boutflour mentions the possible use of a razor blade, because you are saying that he saw a blob nestling inside the 1/4 inch aperture on the flat surface of the silencers metal end cap?

OK..

So, if you are suggesting that David Boutflour took possession of a quantity of blood (described, as a blob) from the 1/4 inch aperture on the flat end of the silencers end cap, ask yourself the following questions..
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 08:00:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
In this example, I could present others, David Boutflour mentions the possible use of a razor blade, because you are saying that he saw a blob nestling inside the 1/4 inch aperture on the flat surface of the silencers metal end cap?

OK..

So, if you are suggesting that David Boutflour took possession of a quantity of blood (described, as a blob) from the 1/4 inch aperture on the flat end of the silencers end cap, ask yourself the following questions..

How come that when Cook presented that first silencer to Glynis Howard at Huntingdon Lab' by on the 13th August 1985, that what appeared to be dried blood was still nestling there in the first silencers 1/4 inch aperture on the flat surface of its metal end cap?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 08:04:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
Yet, further still..

Fast forward to the 29th August 1985, and the photographs of the first silencer taken by Cook surrounding the dismantling exercise of that first silencer by Cook himself?

How come by your presentation of the alleged facts, that there still appears to exist a stain of sorts, there on the flat end of the silencers end cap, many days after you say that David Boutflour first noticed the same, which he described as a blob of blood (or a jam like substance), oh and what make mention of a razor blade?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 08:11:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 47146
Yet, further still..

Fast forward to the 29th August 1985, and the photographs of the first silencer taken by Cook surrounding the dismantling exercise of that first silencer by Cook himself?

How come by your presentation of the alleged facts, that there still appears to exist a stain of sorts, there on the flat end of the silencers end cap, many days after you say that David Boutflour first noticed the same, which he described as a blob of blood (or a jam like substance), oh and what make mention of a razor blade?

So..

You agree there was what appeared to be a blob of 'a jam like substance' on the knurl, or the flat end of the silencers end cap, and that there was some mention of a razor blade?

Please, what was a razor blade mentioned for?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...